COMMITTEE MOVED FOR. (Hansard, 3 July 1860)

CAPTAIN ESMONDE
said, he rose pursuant to notice to move for the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire into the present system of nomination to cadet-ships in the Royal Navy. There was a general impression, that the navy was—especially as regarded the middle classes—a close service, and that there was not sufficient publicity or responsibility attached to the nominations to cadetships. It appeared from a Parliamentary return that during the five years ending in 1859 the entire number of nominations was 1,019. Of these twelve were given to the Colonies, fourteen to the Royal Naval School, and 248 to flag-officers and captains. The remainder (745) were distributed, as stated in the return, by the "Board." He wanted to know what was the meaning of that word "Board," and how the "Board" acted, whether individually or collectively, in the distribution of cadetships. In asking those questions he by no means desired to insinuate or assert that abuses existed. He should be delighted to find the Report of the Committee he wished to see appointed negativing the idea that any abuse existed. But he was entitled to make the remark that if there were no abuse existing, there could be no objection to inquiry, and if it turned out that there were, then the sooner it was remedied the better. He did not expect that the Government would offer any opposition to the appointment of the 1342 Committee, because he had a very good precedent for his Motion. The hon. Member for King's County (Mr. Hennessy) had moved for a Committee to inquire into the present mode of examining candidates for appointments in the civil service. The hon. Gentleman the Secretary for the Treasury opposed the Motion, but said he did so only because the Government did not think the time had arrived when an inquiry of the kind could be fully acted upon. To that it was replied that the object of the Motion was simply to ascertain what the system was, and upon that, the Government withdrew all opposition. He therefore, placed his Motion on the same ground, and he wanted, by the appointment of the Committee, to ascertain the nature of the system under which the cadetships were distributed.

§ LORD CLARENCE PAGET
said, he thought the hon. and gallant Gentleman should have told the House whether there existed, or he conceived there existed, any real ground of complaint as to the nomination to cadetships. He had heard none himself from any quarter. At the same time, he was aware that the introduction of a system of competitive examination had many things to recommend it; indeed, he had himself brought that question before the House, and he still entertained the belief that it would be advisable to establish a system of limited competition as regarded the entries to cadetships. But the subject was fraught with considerable difficulties. Boys of twelve years of age were eligible for cadetships, and every one knew that a competitive examination among boys of that age would be incomplete and unsatisfactory. It must necessarily be confined to the lower branches of educational subjects, and would afford no criterion of what the future abilities of the competitors might be. The Duke of Somerset had established a system of competitive examination with regard to the marine cadets, who entered the service at a more advanced age than the naval cadets, and if it succeeded the Board would doubtless consider the propriety of extending it to other departments of the service. In the engineering department he had himself introduced a purely competitive examination with respect to the factory boys, who, however, were not examined until they were close upon fourteen years of age. Under a system of competitive examination how would the hon. and gallant Gentleman propose to deal with the nominations to Naval 1343 Cadetships now given to the Colonies? Were half-a-dozen boys to be brought from North America or Australia for the purpose of being examined in this country? One or two might probably be successful, but the remainder would be sent back again disappointed. The House would see, as he had already said, that the subject was surrounded by difficulties. He was not aware that any fault could be found with the Board of Admiralty for the manner in which they distributed the nominations at their disposal. Naval officers were badly paid, and there were many who depended entirely upon the pittance they received in the shape of half-pay. The only boon held out to them was that of having their sons put into the navy. It would be an act, not only of great injustice, but of great impolicy to subject their sons to a competitive examination. At present a large majority of the whole number of nominations were given to service claims. Considerable intricacy was involved in the question, and he thought the House would do well not to refer it to a Select Committee, but rather to trust to the Board to make improvements when they saw that these could be judiciously introduced.

MR. LINDSAY
said, his noble and gallant Friend had refused to grant the Committee, but he had not told the House by what principle the Board were guided by their selections. He found from a Return which had been placed in his hand that out of 1,019 nominations between the years 1854–9, only twelve had been bestowed on young men from the Colonies. The argument of the noble Lord on that score did not therefore amount to much. He never made but one application to the Admiralty, and that was on behalf of the son of the late General Niel, who, having been abroad for twenty years fighting the battles of his country, wrote to him to see what he could do for one of his boys. He applied to the Admiralty for a cadetship, basing his request altogether on public grounds, as he believed that the favour would be readily granted to the son of so distinguished an officer, but the application was refused. Afterwards the wife of that distinguished officer came to London; she was a lone woman, living in a country place, knowing nobody. He (Mr. Lindsay) again made application to the Admiralty, and was again refused. That was the first favour he had ever asked of the Admiralty, and it should be the last. It seemed that there were 745 cadetships at the dis- 1344 posal of the Admiralty. How were they distributed?

§ LORD CLARENCE PAGET
said, he had stated that three-fourths were given to service claims.

MR. LINDSAY
said, that a portion of those were the 240 given to officers. How were the remainder disposed of? Unless he received a more satisfactory explanation as to how these nominations were given, and the principle which guided the Board, he should consider it his duty on public grounds to vote for the Motion.

MR. TAYLOR
said, an instance had come to his knowledge, in which the ground of relationship to a distinguished officer was not recognized at the Admiralty as affording a claim to a cadetship, but fortunately the applicant possessed private interest, by which he was enabled to obtain it.

§ MR. WHITBREAD
said, he could not conceive what grounds existed for granting the Committee, unless it were charged that these cadetships had been jobbed away. Did the hon. Member believe that boys were improperly admitted, and how did he propose to rectify such a state of things? Would he introduce competition, and was it to be limited or unlimited? Was it proposed to take away altogether from the Admiralty, and to vest in some other Board, the power of nominating to cadetships? The hon. Member had not told the House the grounds on which the cadetship that he applied for had been refused. It might be that he had delayed his application until in fairness to others it could not be complied with.

§ MR. JOHN LOCKE
said, the names of the candidates for cadetships were put down on a very long list, and the object of the present Motion was to discover the principle on which the Government made their selection from that list. If the system was fair and above-board, there ought to be no objection on the part of the Board of Admiralty to the appointment of the Committee; if there were anything improper in the mode according to which these selections were made, the House, on arriving at the facts, would recommend some better mode of appointment. It was a matter of grave importance.

MR. BEAMISH
remarked that the noble Lord the Secretary to the Admiralty when in opposition brought forward Motions for inquiring into the administration of the Admiralty Department, with which he, as a naval officer, must have been acquainted, 1345 and the object of which, therefore, could only be to discover abuses if they existed, He could not understand on what ground the Government refused inquiry into the subject; and he should therefore feel it to be his duty to support the Motion of his hon. Friend if he went to a division.

§ SIR FRANCIS BARING
said, it would appear now-a-days as if everything were to be made the subject of inquiry. He must, however, confess he did not in the present instance think any good ground for inquiry had been made out, inasmuch as all the information which the supporters of the Motion seemed to require might be obtained by moving for Returns on the subject. Be that, however, as it might, he could from his own experience at the Admiralty undertake to say that officers had frequently, without any interest whatever and merely because of their own services, obtained nominations to cadetships for their sons. He might add that it was impossible to grant every application of the kind, and that he did not think it would be found sound policy to keep the whole of those appointments for the sons of naval and military officers, to the exclnsion of civilians.

§ MR. SPEAKER
resumed the Chair; House counted, and forty Members not being present,